No, its purpose is clearly to prevent others from reselling ES as a service at all since it's effectively impossible for anyone offering ES as a service to comply with the SSPL, if they were only concerned about others that offer ES as a service sharing their code AGPLv3 would be sufficient.

> The SSPL allows free and unrestricted use, as well as modification, with the simple requirement that if you provide the product as a service, you must also publicly release any modifications as well as the source code of your management layers under SSPL.

Not a lawyer, but I think AWS fall foul of "as well as the source code of your management layers" because they have a massive amount of closed source stuff running behind their ES service.

GPL licenses are not SSPL compatible, so it would likely still be impossible to comply even if their ES service was entirely open source.

Meaning the entire codebase of the infrastucture that provides the offering. I.e. the underlying code behind AWS. Not a big deal right?

Unfortunately for you, there's a decent chance that AWS freezes their support at a version before this license change, and never offers upgrades. As far as I know, AWS has never agreed to offer services based on code under the SSPL license.